Truth Magazine

By Roy E. Cogdill

The church of the New Testament is undenominational for the reason that it has no denominational or human creed, and no denominational or human organization. When the church anywhere departs from this New Testament pattern either by changing its name, creed (belief and teaching) or organization, it becomes a denomination. Such a departure can characterize either just one congregation or a whole group of churches under the same leadership and influence. Perhaps the reason God in His infinite wisdom gave the church no other organization than the local body or congregation and authorizes no sort of federation of these local churches of Christ was in order to prevent wholesale apostasy. When churches are federated, either in work or organization or by the pooling of their resources in some intercongregational project, it always means wholesale apostasy when a departure is made.

Organization of the Church

The simple pattern of New Testament church organization had as its salient features: (1) Christ as its only authority-“the head over all things to the church, which is His body” (Eph. 1:22-23); (2) Elders over every local church of Christ (Acts 14:23);(3) Deacons as special servants (Phil. 1:1). In the New Testament scriptures, no man can find anything smaller, larger, or other than this simple organization. In any community, saved people were added “together” to work together in Christian fellowship in accomplishing the mission God gave His church on this earth to perform. All that was accomplished in the New Testament day was done by Christians through and in this divine arrangement, unless it was purely individual action. When any other organization is formed, the church apostatizes and becomes a denominational or sectarian organization.

The church can be as truly apostate when it departs from the divine pattern of organization as when it corrupts the worship with human innovations, or its teaching and faith with the doctrines and commandments of men. In fact, Satan has always started the people of God on the road to apostasy by corrupting their government. It was true when Israel wanted a “king” that they might be like the nations around them. It was true when the churches of the New Testament yielded to the spirit of iniquity already at work in Paul’s day and departed from the principles of autonomy, independence, and equality of local churches of Christ. Out of this departure grew the “man of sin, the son of perdition,” the Roman Catholic Church. The same thing was true when in the latter part of the Nineteenth Century, churches of Christ on this continent began to form themselves into “co-operatives,” later to merge these into the American Christian Missionary Society and finally to develop the Christian Church denomination.

God’s plan is elders, bishops, or pastors in every church. This means, as we have already pointed out, that each local church has its own elders or bishops to super-intend and direct its work and that no eldership has the oversight of more than one local church either in its worship, work, resources, discipline or membership. The extending of the authority of elders is one sure way to corrupt the government of the church and lead the church into apostasy.

Elders

It takes two things to make an elder in the church of the Lord. One is for a man to qualify or meet the divine standard required of elders and laid down by divine authority. These qualifications are found in 1 Timothy 3, and in Titus 1. No man perfectly possesses all of these qualifications, of course, but he must have all of them in a reasonable degree and there are none of them that can be cancelled out by the authority of anyone. The second thing required is appointment. The record says, “And when they had ordained them elders in every church” (Acts 14:23). Other translations read “appointed.” The apostle Paul and those accompanying him acted “for” the church in this appointing. It is implied that the church had some voice or right which was thus respected in this matter. It would be difficult for a man to act as an elder when the church did not approve or regard him as fit and qualified.

The New Testament nowhere indicates that men just grew into and assumed this work of being an elder in the Lord’s church. This would leave the church at the mercy of a man who considered himself qualified when the church did not so consider. On the other hand the church might consider a man as an elder, thinking that he had sufficiently grown or matured into such, when he did not so consider himself, and would therefore be unwilling to serve. “Appointment” is therefore a part of the divine plan. Not the arbitrary appointment of one man’s judgment but one approved by the church over which he is to be a bishop or overseer. This appointment which is a part of the divine plan for the governing of the Lord’s church cannot be dispensed with by the authority of man any more than the qualifications set forth by the Lord.

When a church tries to operate without elders to oversee its work, it is disorganized, haphazard in its work and is like any other organization without anyone with fixed responsibility in which the business and responsibility of everyone belongs to no one. Only in their immaturity, and until they developed qualified men, did churches of the New Testament period carry on their work under such a handicap. How does a church operate without elders? God nowhere tells us. If he had, we would have an option or choice to carry on the work of the church either with or without elders. But God’s plan calls for elders in “every church” and this expression is as definite and mandatory as it can be made. Compare kata mian sabbaton, kata polin, and kata ecclesian. The first expression is found in the Greek New Testament in 1 Cor. 16:1. The second expression is found in Acts 14:23. The first means “every first day of the week.” The second means “every city” and the third means “every church.” Those preachers who try by every kind of sophistry and conniving that can be devised to get rid of the scriptural organization of “elders in every church” had just well get rid of the idea of contribution “every first day” for one goes as easily and rightly as the other.

It is as scriptural for one eldership to be over many churches as it is for a church :to set aside New Testament teaching and operate permanently without an eldership. Both represent a departure from the government ordained by the Lord for His church. In a district court trial, in a law suit concerning the elders and the preacher of a local church of Christ a number of years ago, when the preacher on the stand was questioned by the district judge and denied that the church either had any elders or needed any and was directly asked “who is in authority or has charge of the work of this organization?”, the preacher replied “No one.” Upon being given this answer the judge remarked, “This is the first thing that claims to be an organic body that I have ever heard of without any organization of without either head or tail to its organization.” Unscrupulous men of ambition are left free to promote and direct the affairs of the Lord’s church to their own satisfaction when there are no elders. Often-far too often-these unscrupulous men are preachers who simply do not want the restrictions of working under an eldership. Such men are anarchists and spiritual bolsheviks at heart no matter how sound they may be otherwise.

Truth Magazine XIX: 49, pp. 776-777
October 23, 1975

By E. E. McCool, Jr.

I remember years ago, on the day I caught my son smoking, I shook with rage, but tried to explain to him that I knew teenagers thought it was smart to smoke, but actually that they are poisoning their bodies. “There’s a warning on the cigarette package and on all the ads that smoking is dangerous to your health. It weakens the body and can lead to cancer-not in all cases, but in enough that any smoker is taking a risk. And, doing anything to harm the body is wrong (1 Cor. 6:19-20).” 1 showed him the preacher’s articles in the church bulletin, etc.

Sunday came, and as we walked into the building, there stood one of the elders with one of the Bible School teachers and the song leader-all three were smoking. After church, my son asked me if I thought it was still wrong to smoke. I replied that I did. My son looked at me and said, “Dad, those men are the leaders of the church here. They lead the worship! You can hardly lead a prayer, and you propose to know more about what’s right or wrong than they?” I told him that they smoked from habit. They wanted to stop, but didn’t have the strength. “Ask any one of them, and they will all say they wish they could stop. Ask them how much money they waste on cigarettes. Ask them if they think it is healthy.” I realized it was useless-I had lost my son.

I felt ashamed of myself and sorry for those men at church. They didn’t realize the impact that their smoking had on our youth (Matt. 18:7). If the preacher stands up and says smoking is wrong, and proves it by the Bible, government documents and doctors’ reports; and then church leaders and the influential men decide to disregard this message-then why can’t our young people disregard the same message, or the message about dancing, petting, drinking, lying, stealing, drugs-or any other message they desire?

But, I guess it really doesn’t matter anymore. As I walked into the church building this Monday afternoon, I walked past the elder, Bible School teacher and song leader as they took one last puff. After I was seated, they came and took their seats with the other pall bearers. It looked like we had all come to bury our mistakes. I’ll face my God and have to account for my failure. How many will they have to account for? You see, today we buried my son-he died of lung cancer!

(Editorial Note: Though fictional, the above article by a young man just out of college, is worth reading through again. He hits the point on the head hard. Pause and ponder on your influence.)

Truth Magazine XIX: 49, p. 775
October 23, 1975

By Keith Ward

Many have tried to discredit the Bible’s authority over our lives. Some say it has no value because its truths are dated and not applicable to modern times; others maintain that scribal copying errors have so corrupted the text that it is no longer the word of God. A third group feels that so much is lost in translation that we cannot take the Bible as a rule of faith. Even many in the church will accept only the words of Jesus; unless they find the words in red letters, these people discount their value. Let us turn to the Bible itself to answer the arguments of these critics, scholars and Jesus-only people.

Jesus’ Historical Position Parallels Ours

Jesus’ attitude toward the Old Testament shows his reverence for scripture as the word of God. Many do not realize that Jesus stood in approximately the same relationship to the law of Moses as we do to the New Testament. Jesus lived 1,500 years after the giving of the law; we are 1,900 years after the writing of the New Testament. Jesus had a text that had been copied for centuries and nearly lost during the reign of idolatrous kings (Remember how Josiah found the lost copy when he restored the Temple, 2 Chron. 34:14-23). We have the New Testament which has been copied for centuries and was nearly lost during the Dark Ages. Roman culture was at its zenith and scholars scoffed at the peasants backward belief in God and in life after death. Today, even theologians are teaching, “God is dead,” and our society has no room for God. By examining this parallel, we see how we ought to treat the inspired New Testament.

By observing how the Son of God treated and used the Old, we can grasp the power and relevance of the New.

All Must Be Fulfilled

Jesus did not dismiss the Old Testament as outdated or say that its truth was lost in scribal errors. He stated that it all must be fulfilled (Luke 24:44). Further, he said, “Till heaven and earth pass away one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all things are accomplished” (Matt. 5:18). Hebrew looks like chicken scratching and would be even more susceptible to scribal error than New Testament Greek. In spite of this, Jesus said that not even one of the smallest marks would pass away until all was fulfilled. A jot and a tittle are comparable to the dotting of an “i” or the crossing of a “t” in English.

Jesus used scripture as the ultimate authority. “It is written,” left no room for appeal; it was unanswerable. He obviously believed that short scripture quotations were authoritative and valid, though such is often patronized as “proof-text quoting” today.

Scripture Terminates Temptation

Appeal to scripture terminated the temptation in the wilderness (Matt. 4:1-11). Satan three times tempted Jesus and three times Jesus answered with a quote from the Law of Moses (Dent. 8:3; 6:16, 13). Satan did not appeal to the fact that the law was 1,500 years old, had been copied by innumerable fallible scribes, or that an ink-drop or fly speck could change the meaning of the Hebrew. Both Jesus and Satan recognized that the quotes were accurate and authoritative. Despite elapsed time and numerous copyings and translations, it was still the word of God.

Better than Testimony from the Dead

When Jesus related the story of Lazarus and the rich man, he placed the scripture above the testimony of one raised from the dead.

Consider how closely you would listen to a friend whom you had seen dead and buried, but a year later rang your doorbell. Being skeptical, you would check fingerprints and shared memories, until at last you were sure he was your dead friend come alive. Would you not strain to hear every word of his message from the beyond? When the rich man requested that Lazarus be allowed to return and warn his brothers, Abraham replied, “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded if one rise from the dead” (Luke 16:31).

Words Inspired not Merely Concepts

Jesus gave attention and significance to the smallest detail of the language. Modern scholars reject much scripture to avoid “being picayune,” or they appeal to possible scribal error. They do not feel that we can trust the words of the scripture, but should deal only with general teaching and broad concepts.

The Son of God based an argument on the smallest letter of the Hebrew alphabet, the yodh. When teaching the Lordship and eternal nature of the Messiah, Jesus posed a riddle (Matt. 22:41-46). David said, “The Lord said unto my Lord” (Psa. 110:1). “The Lord” is Jehovah; “my Lord” is the Messiah. Jesus asks how the Messiah can be both the son of David and David’s Lord. The Pharisees could not answer. We know that it was because Jesus, the eternal Son of God, was born of a virgin in David’s lineage. Jesus’ opponents recognized the argument as valid and unanswerable, although it was based on the little word “my.”

In the same chapter, Jesus based his argument for life after death on the verb tense used by Moses (Matt. 22:31-32). “1 am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, .and the God of Jacob” (Ex. 3:6). At the time Moses wrote, these men had been dead for hundreds of years. Thus, when Jesus states the axiom, “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living,” he has shown that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were alive at the time God spoke. Therefore, man has an immortal soul. Today, men say we cannot trust the words of the scripture because of various possible meanings and difficulties of interpretation. Jesus, the divine interpreter, used a verb tense as his only proof of man’s immortality.

Is the New Testament as Strong?

It is clear that the Son of God believed in the verbal inspiration of the Old Testament. We can trust it to be word for word exactly what God said, modern scholars notwithstanding. Can we trust the New Testament in the same manner, or is it subject to human error? Jesus promised that the New Testament would be as strong as the Old. “Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth; for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak; and he will shew you things to come” (John 16:13). The Holy Spirit was to guide the Apostles into all truth. Therefore, when they finished speaking, no truth was left unrevealed that God desired man to know. The Holy Spirit spoke from God and the Apostles declared what the Holy Spirit gave them. This is the same method used to reveal the Old Testament which Jesus taught was all powerful (2 Pet. 3:20-21). Thus, the New Testament is the word of God. The apostles themselves recognized their inspiration and often spoke of it.

The Apostles Claimed Inspiration

Peter placed the writings of Paul on the same plane as the Old Testament (2 Peter 3:15-16). Peter says that unsteadfast men wrest with the epistles of Paul as they also do with other scripture. That word “other” shows that Peter believed that Paul’s writings were scripture. Peter commands his reader to remember two things (2 Pet. 3:2). One is the words of the Holy Prophets (the Old Testament); the other is “the commandments of the Lord and Savior through your apostles.” Peter states that the words which he and the other apostles spoke and wrote were in truth the Lord’s. Paul also claimed inspiration when he wrote. “The things which I write unto you they are the commandments of the Lord” (1 Cor. 14:37). He did not imagine them or devise a logical system of philosophy; they were given him by God. (Other passages where writers claim inspiration are: 1 Thessalonians 2:13, 1 Cor. 2:4, 13, 2 Cor. 13:3, Eph. 3:25). Jesus promised it. The apostles claimed it. Are we going to call them liars by denying the verbal inspiration of the New Testament?

Role-To Preserve

The role of inspiration in preserving the scripture word for word as God meant for us to have it is seldom studied. Almighty God, the creator spoke to man. It is inconceivable that our all-powerful, all-wise God would allow his word to fall into a state of disrepair. The Holy Spirit guarantees that the truth was correctly recorded in the right words (1 Cor. 2:13), and preserves those words for future generations. Having once given man the truth that he intended to be the standard until the end of time (Acts 2:39), God did not fumble the ball and leave us without a guide to save our souls.

The Bible does not contain the word of God; it is the word of God. “God having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in his Son” (Heb. 1:1). Old and New Testament alike are the very word of God, given and preserved by the Holy Spirit.

Means and Methods and the Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit sometimes dictated word for word what the prophet was to write. Moses was commanded, “Write these words” (Ex. 34:37). On this occasion he was merely a secretary who took dictation from God. Much scripture does not seem to be dictated. The authors are permitted to use their own style and background. Their vocabularies and grammatical ability vary widely. In such cases, the role of inspiration is to guarantee that the words or illustrations the author chooses exactly express the will and word of God. The author is given some freedom in his writing, but not the freedom to err.

Revelation and Inspiration

What is inspiration? Often it is described as “Godbreathed,” which means that God breathes the words into the mouths of the men who speak. But this does not answer, “How?” Perhaps more can be understood if it is compared to something it is not.

Revelation and inspiration overlap in many areas, and some mistakenly believe that they are the same. It was necessary for many things to be revealed. Creation is a good example; man could not have learned,the origin of the universe unless God told him. However, other things such as the shipwreck in Acts 27, can be known exclusive of revelation. Luke was there and suffered the storm with Paul, thus, he could write from memory. It was not necessary for the Holy Spirit to reveal what happened. In the case of revelation, inspiration insures that what has been revealed is correctly recorded. In the case of personal memories or research, inspiration protects the truth from a faulty memory or a poor perspective and guarantees that it is correctly recorded. Revelation makes truth known that could not otherwise have been learned. Inspiration guarantees that what is recorded is truth and preserves it.

Revelation and Understanding

It is evident that the inspired men did not always understand what they were doing. Luke investigated and researched. Seemingly, he did not know that he was inspired, that the Holy Spirit moved him to write. He said, “It seemed good to me . . . to write” (Luke 1:1-4). He was not commissioned to write as was John (Rev. 1:19). Luke took it upon himself to “write in order” the narrative of the life of Jesus. Neither did the Holy Spirit reveal anything to him, he talked to witnesses as would any biographer who wrote the life of a great man, “even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eyewitnesses.” He researched, “having traced the course of all things accurately from the first.” Luke was moved by the Holy Spirit, and though he did not know that he was inspired, we do. Paul quoted Luke’s writing in the same sentence as a statement from the law, and made it equal with that statement (1 Tim. 5:18).

The prophets knew they were inspired, yet often did not understand what they wrote. Peter comments that they searched “what time or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto” (1 Pet. 1:10-11). They spoke the words of God, but were not permitted a full understanding of what they had said.

Some men spoke, neither realizing that their words were divine, nor understanding them. The classic example ig Caiphas, who prophesied, “One man should die for the people” (John 11:49-52). Caiphas referred to the death of one whom he considered a revolutionary in order that Israel might maintain her remaining independence and not be crushed in a futile revolt against Rome. John reveals that Caiphas prophesied of the atoning sacrifice of Jesus death for all men.

All were Inspired

All these groups of men spoke by inspiration: Peter, Paul, et al, who knew they were inspired and understood what they spoke; Luke, et al, who understood but did not realize that they were inspired; the prophets who knew they were inspired but often did not understand their words; and Caiphas who neither knew nor understood.

It is the words that are inspired, not the method or the man. No matter how great or small the man’s understanding, the words are given, guaranteed, and preserved by the Holy Spirit. We can depend on them. (Additional copies of this article may be ordered from Keith Ward, above address.)

Truth Magazine XIX: 49, pp. 773-775
October 23, 1975

By Cecil Willis

(Editor’s Note: Though the following poems have been printed many times in several papers and bulletins, perhaps there are some of our younger readers who have never seen them. Ben Bogard was perhaps the ablest Baptist debater that ever lived. It is said that he debated our brethren about one hundred times. On the other hand, W. Curbs Porter was the ablest negative debater that I ever heard. He was unexcelled in repartee. Perhaps you will enjoy his poetic reply to Baptist Bogard. Some softies of today would think such an exchange undignified. But somehow, those were the days when the Lord’s church grew most rapidly in modern times. Truth never shines more brightly than after it has been through the heat of controversy. – Cecil Willis)

The Preacher’s Coffee by Ben M. Bogard

“I have a pleasant story, which I wish to tell in rhyme,

About a circuit preacher who lived in recent time.

He was a circuit rider for good John Wesley’s brand;

And rode the finest circuit in all the blessed land.

At one of his good charges, some members, not a few,

Became quite sorely troubled about the word `into’.

The Good Book says quite plainly, in Acts in chapter eight,

`They went down into water,’ as Baptist people state.

The preacher preached a sermon of extra zeal and might;

And to his satisfaction, he set the passage right.

`Into’ does not mean `into’, but only `at’ or `nearby’.

They went down to the water and got a small supply.

But near the place of worship, there lived a sister Brown

And for her splendid cooking she’d gained a great renown.

Her yellow-legged chickens, her luscious cakes and pies,

Had often made that preacher roll up his weeping eyes.

And her delicious coffee! In all the circuit round,

The preacher oft admitted, its like could not be found.

So when he preached his sermon with extra power and length

He loved at the Brown’s table to revive his ebbing strength.

But sister Brown was a Baptist, the strongest in the land;

She oft reproved the Methodists for changing God’s command.

She heard the preacher’s sermon, and thought the subject o’re.

Then asked him home for dinner, as she oft had done before.

She ground her good brown coffee, her kettle steaming hot,

And put it ‘at’ or `nearby’ the famous coffee pot.

She poured her guest a cupful (I think it was no sin).

‘But you forgot, dear sister, to put the coffee in.’

‘No, no, dear sir, that’s coffee; I ground a good supply,

And put it ‘at’ the kettle (`into’ is ‘at’ or ‘nearby’).

By the logic of your sermon (I thought it rather thin),

If ‘at’ or ‘nearby’ is ‘into’, I put the coffee IN.

So if you will truly promise, no more such stuff to teach,

I’ll go and make some coffee, in line with Bible speech.

And this time I will follow instructions to the dot,

And put the coffee INTO, not `at’ or `near’ the pot!”

Sequel to the Preacher’s Coffee by W. Curtis Porter

“Just then in stepped a preacher, who wears a Bible name,

The simple name of ‘Christian’ of apostolic fame.

God put into the Bible no human names to wear;

And hence he was contented, the inspired mark to wear.

Then Mrs. Brown he questioned, if surely she’d admit

Whether `into’ had the meaning which she had given it.

She said she would most surely, and who would dare say not.

`No coffee’s in the vessel, till put into the pot.’

Then gently spoke the preacher: ‘Don’t censure preacher Jones;

You have spoken condemnation, to yourself in strongest tones.

No need to hold tradition; such never has sufficed.

The Bible says that baptism puts people INTO Christ.’

‘No, no,’ replied the hostess. `Such preaching is a sin.

Sir, the preacher gives baptism to those already in.’

‘Well, well,’ then spoke the preacher, `it surely gives me fun,

To see this faithful Baptist throw down her Baptist gun.

If ‘into’ has the meaning you have given it at last,

Your shot at circuit riders, has gone into a blast!

Then Phillip and the eunuch went ‘into’ the creek;

For they were ‘in’ already – and had been for a week!

When Christians are invited ‘into’ that heavenly clime,

They’ll really not go ‘into’ – they were in it all the time!

And when the Lord will banish, the wicked ‘into’ hell,

They’ll merely stay ‘in’ pleasures, on earth they love so well.

You thought the coffee `into’ the coffee pot,

But it was `in’ already, and really boiling hot.

Now, Mrs. Brown, please promise, that you’ll not have the gall,

To hit folks with the Bible, unless you take it all.

The Bible says so plainly (to which you have referred),

‘They went down into the water,’ I trust its every word.

It tells us that the righteous go `into’ mansions fair;

It tells us that the wicked go down ‘into’ despair

It tells us just as surely, not only once but twice,

That that which is called ‘baptism,’ puts people `into’ Christ.

Now take it all, dear lady; false preachers you can rout.

Or else just raise the window, and throw the Bible out!”

Truth Magazine XIX: 49, pp. 771-772
October 23, 1975